Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcut: COM:VIC

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

How to nominate an image for VI status[edit]

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination.

Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)[edit]

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.


Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this: 

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.

Renomination[edit]

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in 

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with 

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

  • Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
  • replace the review parameter with
|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}
  • Save the page.
  • There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
  • Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review[edit]

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist, but with status set to "discussed". Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list: 

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where Scope is the scope of both images, and candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

The status parameter of each candidate should remain set to "discussed" while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates[edit]

How to review an image[edit]

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedure[edit]

  • On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Example
 You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Example
 You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~
  •  Support Reason for supporting. -- Example
 You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.
How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review period[edit]

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.

You can submit new nominations starting on COM:VIC.

Pending valued image candidates[edit]

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
53,776 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
 48,312 (89.8%) 
Undecided
  
 2,993 (5.6%) 
Declined
  
 2,471 (4.6%) 


New valued image nominations[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-02 12:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Myuchelys latisternum (Saw-shelled turtle) juvenile dorsal

 Question This widely-used image has a very different colour from the nom and matches the en.wiki description better. --Tagooty (talk) 05:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "Juvenile" does not appear anywhere in the image file page. Please update. --Tagooty (talk) 13:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-03 14:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Notamacropus rufogriseus rufogriseus (White wallaby) female
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-03 19:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Borgward AG automobiles - stores
Used in:
de:Borgward Group, en:Borgward Group, fr:Borgward Group, pl:Borgward Group
  •  Question do we think this justifies a VI scope? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Comment I nominated this pic, since the return of Borgward was not successful and there exist no more Stores.--Alexander-93 (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
B3251 (talk) on 2024-01-04 19:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Imperial Theatre, Saint John
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Gzen92 (talk) on 2024-01-05 12:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Fish ladders in Vogelgrun.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-01-05 17:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Restored House in Scuol Plaz.

 Best in Scope Terragio67 (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • The remarkable thing about this house is that in the Canton of Graubünden in Switzerland, centuries-old houses in the center of small mountain villages are being restored in old style. This is one of the restored authentic houses.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, I don't think that an unnamed restored house deserves a scope. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:01, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Terragio67 (talk) on 2024-01-05 18:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Chroicocephalus ridibundus (adult in winter plumage) – (Black-headed gull) - Yawning
Reason:
At the moment, it's the only yawning bird inside the Yawning animals category. -- Terragio67 (talk)
  •  Comment The scope is not properly formatted. The binomial name should be in italics followed by the english common name in parenthesis. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, thanks for your indication. --Terragio67 (talk) 07:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Oppose Unlikely to be yawning. We do not need scopes of birds with their mouth open. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yawning animals is one of the most viewed categories on Wikimedia, it contains good images and 12 featured pictures with hilarious and at the same time instructive shots. So, your statement that adding a good categorized photo to Y.A. is useless to Wikimedia seems rather strange to me. In the past I have already seen a Seagull yawn but in these cases you are almost never ready to take a photo, this time I was really lucky because the black-head gull depicted made a series of yawns and I was able to take the third one. I still remember there were other people next to me who watched the scene with amusement. I conclude by repeating again what was stated above: Yawning animals Category is not useless and likely puts people in a good mood. Terragio67 (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment I never said it was useless. I said I don't think it deserves a VI scope. Others may disagree. I suggest a scope based around the binomial name (as already requested) Chroicocephalus ridibundus so voters can (if they have the time) look through hundreds of images to see if this is the best example. You have helped me maintain my impression that the action is unlikely to be a yawn. If the gull made a series of 'yawns' they were unlikely to be yawns. It is much more likely that the bird had something stuck in its throat. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Replyː Charles, I answer you frankly and confirm that I have great respect and admiration for you. However, one can have different points of view in certain circumstances. Above all, I hope you are not upset by what I am honestly trying to sayː

Your response indicates to me that your unique personal view of the Y.A. category, which should not fall under scope VI, may not be shared. And in the event that someone does not share your point of view, you are again trying to dismantle (with personal feelings) what for me and a group of other people was a shared certainty in recognizing the yawning of a bird on Lake Geneva. This attitude is generally incorrect, in my opinion, because it can transversely influence the personal decisions of those who see a point of reference in the field of wildlife photography through you. To explain briefly: Your assertion is akin to an IPSE DIXIT, where a thesis is accepted only on the authority of the person who holds it.

Please do not take this response as a personal attack on you. I just want to state my case: 1. The bird is definitely yawning, 2. the category of yawning animals could deserve a VI section, because yawning still attracts scientific interest today. --Terragio67 (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Comment Nothing taken personally. This forum should (and does) support disagreements and the more information voters have the better. I have nothing against VIs of animals that are, for sure, yawning - see this VI for how to format such a scope. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:03, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Happy you are not upset for what I said to you, and thank you for remind me to apply the correct VI format that also Archeodontosaurus suggested to me in the first comment...
    Kind regards. Terragio67 (talk) 11:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Ok now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-06 09:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Smart Hashtag 1 Brabus - right rear view
Used in:
de:Smart 1
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-06 09:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Lamborghini Huracán Evo GT Celebration - left front view
Used in:
en:Lamborghini Huracán
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-06 10:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Motacilla citreola (museum specimens) (citrine wagtail (citreola)) eggs
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-06 17:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Motacilla alba alba (museum specimens) (white wagtail) eggs
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Famberhorst (talk) on 2024-01-06 17:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Mature Pseudanthium of Helenium 'El Dorado'
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-06 20:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-Benz W214 - left rear view
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz Baureihe 214
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-07 05:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Progetto per la chiesa di San Vidal (Sezion) - Antonio Gaspari - Museo Correr

Is Progetto in Italian an architect's technical term? In English, Project isn't right: something like 'Projection - floor plan; Design - plan view or in modern-speak floorplan? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Gaspari's project, which was too complex and too expensive, was not retained, in favor of a minimalist creation which is what we can see today...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support OK, so it doesn't matter. For this we might use the word proposal or submission Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-07 05:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Aglia tau f. melaina – mounted specimen male dorsal

 Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-07 05:41 (UTC)
Scope:
Royal Palace of Venice, ballroom
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-01-07 06:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Drillia angolensis, shell
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-07 07:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthus trivialis eggs (tree pipit (trivialis)) eggs
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-07 11:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Macropus giganteus (Eastern grey kangaroo) hopping (composite image)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-07 11:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Thylogale stigmatica stigmatica (Red-legged pademelon)
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-07 16:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Mitsubishi Colt (2023) - left rear view
Used in:
de:Mitsubishi Colt, en:Mitsubishi Colt
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-07 16:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Toyota Yaris Cross Hybrid (XP210) - left front view
Used in:
ar:تويوتا يارس كروس, bg:Тойота Ярис Крос, de:Toyota Yaris Cross, de:Toyota Yaris (XP21), en:List of Toyota vehicles, en:Toyota Yaris Cross, fr:Toyota Yaris Cross
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-07 16:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid - right front view
Used in:
de:Toyota Corolla Cross
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-07 16:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthus spinoletta eggs (water pipit (spinoletta)) eggs

 Support Best in scope, useful and widely used. --Tagooty (talk) 05:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-01-07 17:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Reformierte Kirche Scuol Entrance to the cemetery.

 Comment Best in scope. I suggest changing "Access" to "Entrance" in the scope as this is the commonly-used term. --Tagooty (talk) 04:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)"Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2024-01-08 04:52 (UTC)
Scope:
St. Joseph's Cathedral, Prayagraj (Allahabad) - front facade
Used in:
en:St. Joseph's Cathedral, Prayagraj • es:Catedral de San José (Prayagraj) • arz:كاتدرائية القديس يوسف (كاتدرائيه فى الهند) • wikidata:Q16900561
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-08 06:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Dahlia × pinnata (Happy Single Win ) - flowers and foliage
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-08 06:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Calcagnetti (Chopines) - Correr Museum Venice
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-08 06:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Le Pont de Labastide-du-Vert, la chèvre blanche - Henri Martin
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-01-08 06:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Ostrea gregarea, shell
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-08 08:56 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthus petrosus (museum specimens) (European rock pipit) eggs
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-08 10:45 (UTC)
Scope:
BMW G60 550e - right front view
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-08 10:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Toyota Yaris Cross Hybrid (XP210) - left rear view
Used in:
de:Toyota Yaris Cross, de:Toyota Yaris (XP21), en:Toyota Yaris Cross, fr:Toyota Yaris Cross
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-08 10:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Hyundai Tucson (NX4, SWB) N Line - left front view
Used in:
en:Hyundai Tucson
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-08 12:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Ornithorhynchus anatinus (platypus) swimming
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-08 12:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Ornithorhynchus anatinus (platypus) diving
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-08 12:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Ornithorhynchus anatinus (platypus) surfacing

Not sure if this deserves a VI scope, but it does show air release.

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2024-01-08 17:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Santa Maria in Aracoeli (Rome), Bell tower
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
MasterRus21thCentury (talk) on 2024-01-08 20:34 (UTC)
Scope:
1997 portrait photo of the first President of Russia Boris Yeltsin
Used in:
ru:Приход Путина к Власти
Reason:
This photo is the only high-resolution photo of the first President of Russia downloaded from the official website kremlin.ru -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk)
  •  Oppose You would need to link to Category:Portrait photographs of Boris Yeltsin but it is not the most valuable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:02, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Charlesjsharp What is the most valuable thing here then? For me, this is primarily the size of the photo, as well as the exact date and its author (if you work with primary sources such as TASS and RIA Novosti, which supply photo and video content for Russian government websites). MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 12:30, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Several in the gallery and probably elsewhere but too many to check. This is high resolution but that means nothing as composition (see foreground) and the technical quality are poor. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-09 06:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of doge Francesco Morosini with the lion of St Mark, Museo Correr in Venice

 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:32, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-09 06:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Aglia tau f. melaina – mounted specimen male ventral
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-09 06:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Amphore de Bétique, (type Dressel 12) - Musée Saint-Raymond Toulouse
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-09 06:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthus campestris (museum specimens) (tawny pipit (campestris)) eggs
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2024-01-09 08:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Deur Kothar main stupa, Rewa District, Madhya Pradesh, India
Used in:
en:Deur Kothar • wikidata:Q3630530
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
iMahesh (talk) on 2024-01-09 11:03 (UTC)
Scope:
Middle Ground Coastal Battery near Mumbai, India
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
iMahesh (talk) on 2024-01-09 11:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Jala Tarangini waterfall in Maredumilli
Reason:
Only available image of Jala Tarangini water falls at Maredumilli on commons -- iMahesh (talk)

Previous reviews
 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC) Yes, but too dark. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-01-09 17:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Hotel Engiadina (Scuol) North side.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-09 20:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Cupra Formentor VZ5 BAT - right rear view
Used in:
de:Cupra Formentor
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-09 20:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-Benz S214 - left front view
Used in:
en:List of Mercedes-Benz vehicles
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-10 06:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Moro che Soffia (Attizzatoio) - Correr Museum

 Support Useful --Llez (talk) 06:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-10 06:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Buddha adorned, 15th century Ayutthaya school Thailand - Musée Georges Labit, Toulouse

 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-01-10 06:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Romanesque Canelobre 65551 - Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya

 Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 08:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2024-01-10 06:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Perrona spirata, shell
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2024-01-10 08:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Statue of St. Francis of Assisi, St. Joseph's Cathedral, Prayagraj (Allahabad), India
Used in:
wikidata:Q124241948
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2024-01-10 09:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthus cervinus (museum specimens) (red-throated pipit) eggs
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Palauenc05 (talk) on 2024-01-10 09:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Hisgenhaus (ca. 1750) in Schweich, Germany.
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Palauenc05 (talk) on 2024-01-10 09:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Brückenzollhäuschen in Longuich, Germany.
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2024-01-10 10:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Chimu Ornaments in Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera. Lima
Used in:
Global usage
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
iMahesh (talk) on 2024-01-10 14:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Only available image, showing the Summit of Netravati Peak
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
iMahesh (talk) on 2024-01-10 14:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Aerial Photograph of Dhyana Buddha Statue
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Hyundai Tucson (NX4, SWB) N Line - left rear view
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Toyota Corolla Cross Hybrid - right rear view
Used in:
de:Toyota Corolla Cross
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Mitsubishi Colt (2023) - left front view
Used in:
de:Mitsubishi Colt, fr:Mitsubishi Colt
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Macropus giganteus tasmaniensis (Forester kangaroo)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Macropus giganteus tasmaniensis (Forester kangaroo) female with joey
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-01-10 16:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Macropus giganteus tasmaniensis (Forester kangaroo) juvenile
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Günther Frager (talk) on 2024-01-10 21:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Ottavio Grimani by Alessandro Vittoria
Open for review.



Pending Most valued review candidates[edit]

agouti[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2019-08-05 09:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Dasyprocta punctata (Central American agouti)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-03-24 15:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Dasyprocta punctata (Central American agouti)
  •  Comment
    We already have a VI in this scope and I see at list one more image of comparable quality, and both are used. Should we start MVR for this scope?
  •  Comment Yes it is better to go through MVR. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Best in Scope now and used --LexKurochkin (talk) 05:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Best in Scope now. --Tupungato (talk) 15:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Portrait of Vicente Guerrero[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) on 2021-01-21 17:47 (UTC)
Scope:

Retrato Vicente Guerrero por Anacleto Escutia en Palacio Nacional (Mexico)

(Portrait of Vicente Guerrero by Anacleto Escutia in Palacio Nacional (Mexico))

Previous reviews

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
ErickTErick (talk) on 2023-10-31 21:45 (UTC)
Scope:

Retrato póstumo del presidente Vicente Guerrero en el Museo Nacional de Historia, Ciudad de México

(Posthumous portrait of President Vicente Guerrero in the National Museum of History, Mexico City)
Reason:
The version of this image which currently considered the most valuable within its scope is of much lower quality than this newer version. In addition, the name given to the scope is factually wrong about the location of the painting (it is not within Palacio Nacional) and Mexico's Spanish name is misspelled (it's México, not Mexico). -- ErickTErick (talk)
  •  Comment There is already an image promoted in VI: you have to go to Pending Most valued review candidates --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Started MVR ErickTErick (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:02 (UTC)
Scope:
El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach

 Comment The original file is the .tiff : File:El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach.tiff. Everypeople can create a better processed image from this file. So what are we suposed to do ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am doing it according this reccomendation Ezarateesteban 23:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:00 (UTC)
Scope:
El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach

 Comment The original file is the .tiff : File:El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach.tiff. Everypeople can create a better processed image from this file. So what are we suposed to do ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Anciens bains municipaux de Colmar[edit]

   

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Gzen92 [discuter] on 2018-01-22 12:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Exterior of anciens bains municipaux (Colmar)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- DeFacto (talk). 17:18, 26 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Gzen92 (talk) on 2023-12-29 07:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Exterior of anciens bains municipaux (Colmar)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 00:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
To initiate a most valued review, please go to the dedicated MVR sub page.
Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR have to have their status set as "discussed" while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to Most valued review, the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Pending valued image set candidates[edit]

Warning This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Valued_image_candidates&oldid=751225986"